-
What did the Supreme Court decide?
The Supreme Court said Mr Augustine did not have to prove that working part-time was the only reason he was treated less favourably. Instead, it was enough to show that his part-time status played a real part in the treatment. In other words, an employer cannot defeat a claim simply by saying there were other reasons for the decision as well.
This helps part-time workers because workplace decisions are rarely explained by one factor alone; a rule may apply to everyone, or an employer may point to business reasons, but a claim may still be possible if the rule or decision disadvantages part-time workers because they work fewer hours.
The case will now return to the Employment Tribunal to decide the remaining issues. The Supreme Court did not rule that Mr Augustine should automatically win his claim; rather it clarified the legal test to be applied.
The UK Supreme Court has handed down its judgment in Augustine v Data Cars Ltd [2026] UKSC 30, a case involving a part-time private hire driver and the fees he had to pay to access his employer’s booking system. The decision is relevant to part-time, flexible and reduced-hours workers because it clarifies an important point: part-time status does not need to be the sole reason for the treatment complained about.
What happened in Augustine v Data Cars Ltd?
Warren Augustine worked as a part-time private hire driver for Data Cars Ltd. Drivers paid a fixed weekly “circuit fee” for access to the company’s booking system.
Mr Augustine argued that paying the same fixed weekly fee as full-time drivers treated him less favourably because he worked fewer hours. In practical terms, the fee cost him more per hour of work than it cost a full-time driver.
He brought his claim under the Part-Time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000, legislation that protects part-time workers from being treated less favourably than equivalent full-time workers because they work part-time.
-
What could less favourable treatment look like?
Mr Augustine’s case was about a fixed fee charged to drivers, but the principle may apply in many different workplaces.
Part-time workers may want to take advice if they are concerned about:
- pay, fees or deductions that affect them more heavily than full-time colleagues
- reduced access to bonuses, benefits or overtime
- fewer training or promotion opportunities
- rota rules that make part-time working harder in practice
- performance targets that do not properly reflect reduced hours
- being excluded from meetings, updates or workplace opportunities
- being treated as less committed because they work part-time
Some differences in treatment may be lawful if the employer can objectively justify them; however, the reason for the treatment and its practical effect on the part-time worker should be carefully considered.
-
Why this ruling may affect flexible and reduced-hours workers
Many people work part-time because of childcare, health, caring responsibilities, study, semi-retirement or work-life balance. Others reduce their hours after returning from maternity leave, sickness absence or a period of stress.
The ruling may be relevant where a workplace rule appears neutral but, in practice, affects part-time workers more heavily. A fixed cost, target, attendance expectation or benefit threshold may apply to everyone, yet still have a greater impact on someone who works fewer hours.
-
What should part-time workers do?
Part-time workers who believe they are being treated less favourably should keep records of what has happened. Useful evidence may include contracts, payslips, rota records, emails, policies, performance targets, and examples of how full-time colleagues are treated.
They can also ask their employer for a written statement of reasons for the treatment. This can help clarify the employer’s position and identify whether the treatment is connected to the worker’s part-time status.
Employment Tribunal time limits are strict, so it is important to take advice quickly. In many cases, a claim must usually be started within three months less one day of the act complained of, and Acas Early Conciliation will usually be required before a claim can be brought.
Acas is the UK’s independent public body for workplace advice, dispute resolution and employment rights guidance.
-
TLW Solicitors’ comment
“The Supreme Court’s decision is a positive step for part-time workers. It recognises that workplace decisions are not always made for just one reason. An employer may have another explanation, but that does not automatically mean part-time status was irrelevant.
The key question is whether being part-time played a real part in the disadvantage. This could affect pay, targets, benefits, working patterns or access to opportunities.
If you are a part-time worker and feel you are being treated less favourably than full-time colleagues, it is worth getting advice early. Contact us to discuss your situation and understand your rights.”
How TLW Solicitors can help
TLW Solicitors advises employees and workers on workplace disputes, discrimination, unfair dismissal, redundancy and Employment Tribunal claims. The specialist Employment Law team can also advise if you have been asked to sign a settlement agreement.
If you work part-time, flexibly or reduced hours and believe you have been treated less favourably than full-time colleagues, we can help you understand your position and possible next steps.
Strict time limits apply to Employment Tribunal claims, so it is important to take advice as soon as possible.
